Grade: A
Synopsis: After stumbling upon a drug deal gone bad in the desert, a man (Josh Brolin) takes a satchel full of money, unaware that a hit man (Javier Bardem) is on its trail.
No Country for Old Men may be the Coen brothers’ best movie so far.
I say “so far” because I think No Country for Old Men represents a kind of milestone for the Coens. They seem to have reached a point in their filmmaking where they’re confident enough in their style that they no longer need to emphasize it. Nor do they downplay it either. No Country for Old Men has the usual quirks you’d expect in a Coen brothers film; they’re just not front and center, instead they’re more matter-of-fact.
Much of the credit undoubtedly belongs to Cormac McCarthy, whose novel provided the basis for the script, though kudos must be given to the Coens for drafting such a faithful screenplay. Their willingness to diverge from the standard Hollywood formula is a large part of what makes the film so satisfying.
No Country for Old Men is several films in one. On the surface it’s the story of an everyman trying to get away with a satchel full of money, but beneath that it’s the story of the passing of time and the changes it brings, and beneath that it’s a story about causality and the nature of fate. That the film works so well on each of these levels is a testament to its greatness.
As for the cast, it’s flawless. Tommy Lee Jones seems natural as a haunted, aging Sherriff, Javier Bardem is terrifying as an enigmatic hit man, and Josh Brolin anchors the entire story as a believable everyman who can’t walk away. Surrounding them is an outstanding supporting cast including Woody Harrelson (in his best role in years), Kelly Macdonald, and Barry Corbin.
Bottom Line: The best film of the year so far. Highly Recommended.
17 Responses on “No Country for Old Men (2007)”:
Jump to Review Form | Trackback URI
-
Jason Tucker said:
Grade: A
Agree all the way. Easily knocked SuperBad out of the running for best movie of the year.
-
Derek said:
Grade: D-
I thought the movie was terrible it was slow and never picked up. its was a good plot but it wasnt a good movie at all. The ending was so terrible.
-
Chad said:
Grade: D
This movie is not spellbinding as it was billed to be. It is slow as hell and the plot is so basic that I spent the whole time in the theater expecting SOMETHING to happen. It never does. Javier Bardem as the hitman is cool as it gets, but there isn’t a good movie surrounding him. Shame on all of the movie reviewers who bamboozled me into seeing this boring, limited, and overhyped pile of self indulgent crap.
-
Will Skelton said:
Grade: F
No Country For Old Men is the worst movie I’ve seen in years; who are these reviewers that say it is a great movie? Did they really watch it while conscious? An absolutely terrible ending was preceded by way too much violence (that many killings would have prompted the national guard to be called out but instead the sheriff is pretty much relaxed about it until the end), a supernatural ability of bad guys to find people in motels and such without any basis for such, a briefcase of money that’s left in limbo (where did it go?), all in all very very unsatisfying and, as I overherar someone else saying just after the movie, “I wish I could erase the whole thing from my memory.”
-
viperboyz said:
Grade: F
This film is so bad im considering suing the coen brothers for the time i wasted watching it.
The plot could of been explosive the ingredients was all present then put on top of a tortoise and left to crawl from film start to film end.
I have no doubt it will win a few oscars as it is critically acclaimed by those who votes count not the actual people who watch it and waste their money.
Save yourself some extra time to enjoy life and the keep your money in your pocket and give this film a miss. -
Dear Darla said:
Grade: F
I wish I could give it something worse, but F is where it ends. This was quite possibly the worst movie I have ever seen. Most of the dialogue was incomprehensible because of the thick southern accent and that was if there was any dialogue in the scenes at all being that most of the movie was completely silent. I didn’t see the purpose in any of the actors in the movie besides the 2 main characters. Tommy Lee Jones was unbearably boring. From what I’ve come to understand this movie was based on a novel, but the plot was terrible and impossible. I just can’t say enough bad things. I don’t understand how these horrible movies are nominated for awards i.e. Sideways, Little Miss Sunshine etc. I guess you throw some big words, a staring contest between strangers and some little kid with an extended vocabulary in a poorly written script with well known actors and you’ve got yourself an oscar!
-
john Vegas said:
Grade: F
F for f—ked. Who would award this movie Oscar?.
There was something great in this plot and the within the characters however the Cohen brothers fail to extract it.
I am glad I watched it though. It is comforting to know my dream to win a best picture Oscar is not so far fetched as first thought.
There are so many films that have lack a great plot, great characters and great cinematography yet string the storyline together some much better than this film.
I can only say that that the drugs that the academy award voters were on while they awarded this flick are a testament to the drug runners portrayed in it.
I must say that I enjoyed “John Rambo” more than this film (at least that was only 70 minutes of pain).
Look out out for my Oscar winning film..
Johnny Vegas
-
Houman said:
Grade: A+
I think it was a really effective piece of film making, it wasen’t really what you see every day on TV, did any of you noticed, there is almost no use of music in the film and still it’s so intresting to watch, photography was also a very effevtive fact, the use of camera and the place that they chose in the great plaines was amazing, and the story just goes on you don’t have time to think about it much, there are no flashbacks
it is one of the best, that’s gonna be a classic
-
Justice said:
Grade: F
I cannot believe this movie received the praise it did. Awful doesn’t fit, terrible is too nice. Several characters didn’t need to be in the movie, Woody Harrelson, Carla Jean’s mom, extras. Boring, slow, unrealistic - several murders and not one cop on the chase. Convenient plot twists, several people ending up in certain places with no explanation of how they knew to go there.
Hal Holbrook was excellent in “Into the Wild” but lost the academy award to Javier Bardem! WHAT? Who are these people who vote? Misguided sense of what America truly is. -
Lorri said:
Grade: F
I thought the plot of this movie, average guy finds drug money and hit man out to get him was riddled with things that did not add to the plot or make sense. Who was Woody supposed to be, or the guy in the office? Tommy Lee Jones did nothing at all in the plot. How did Woody find the guy in the Mexican Hospital? What does the title even mean? It was a waste of time.
-
Spencer Heath said:
Grade: A+
This film was a brilliant piece of work that should be appreciated for it’s incredible rhythm and sense of style. The Coens perfectly brought a Kubrickesque “Realistically interesting” tone to this film, with balance and mood in every beat. The character develepmont and seemingly static traits, gave them a charismatic power that kept us wanting all or nothing. The story was flawed minorly yet took a great deal of attention and patience to understand the entire film. As the audience, we must know that the film is about Ed Tom Bell’s look at this situation. He tells us about what it was like, and how now that he has grown old, it has become to tough for him, hence “No Country For Old Men”. By the look of the negative responses to this film, it reminds me once again that America has fallen deeply in to what is now a very spoiled country. We can never look at a film for it’s artistic and cinematic value, but we wait to be entertained. This film is simply a masterpiece.
-
lachlan said:
Grade: F
I am severly dissapointed that i cannot give this movie a lower rating. This is by far the worst movie i have ever watched. There was close to no talking for the first 30 minutes, it was not engaging at all, the main charecters had no back ground story given about htem at all, i dont even no who the main charecters name was !!?
–ed. note: spoilers removed–
-
Riddlebox said:
Grade: B
This movie is good but could have been great. The ending was alittle shady and i wish they did something more. As for lachlan saying “America has fallen deeply in to what is now a very spoiled country. We can never look at a film for it’s artistic and cinematic value, but we wait to be entertained.” I think some people don’t see the artistc and cinematic value but all in all, it is a movie and i should feel entertained. Otherwise I would be doing something else to blow my time. I do like the Javier Bardem as the hit man. Both the gun and that stun bolt gun were some great weapons that he used. The movie for me was great until the shocking ending of no ending. But still allowing me to use my creative mind……..i guess……..
-
daily dwayne said:
Grade: A-
who are these people giving “No Country” Fs?
wow…this is one of the best movies I have seen in a long time. I do think it could have been 30 mins longer or 30 minutes shorter, to either give a little more detail at the end, or just make it more abrupt (shorter)…but wow, did you people watch the same movie?
Outside of the obvious brilliance of Bardem, Jones and even Brolin…Woody Harrelson’s part was fantastic.
I mean this film had everything…super mega ultra violence, a bag full of drug money, dead dogs, annoying mother-in-laws, cowboy hats and WOODY!
most of all it was a fantastic story, perfect setting and phenomenal execution.
-
StevieWonder said:
Grade: F
As others have said, it is disappointing that “F” is the lowest grade you can give this turd of a film.
I heard this was a great movie, so immediately I expected it was going to suck and boy was I right. The movie just drags along until it finally gets to the end and leaves you wondering, “What the fuck?” I mean, seriously. How the hell does a movie with that kind of ending get any sort of praise. The whole thing sucked, but the ending was so god-awful that everyone who watched this movie should be refunded.
-
Robert Gilmore said:
Grade: C-
The Coen Brothers are perhaps my generation’s favorite filmmakers. For many years they made the most unique and interesting American films. The turning point, though, was “O Brother Where Art Thou” which was thier biggest hit and unforetunately the seeds of their decline were planted there. It wasn’t noticed right away as “The Man Who Wasn’t There” was a top notched noir hommage, endlessly enjoyable for film buffs “The Ladykillers” and “Intolerable Cruelty” were terrible and I think that all of thier fans were holding their breath in hopes that they still had it in them. “No Country For Old Men” is an exceedingly tired film that somehow caught on with the public. Bardem’s charcater is truly menacing but Jones simply plays Tommy Lee Jones and with very little imagination. The story is listless and the visual impact is one of monotony rather than enticement. “Burn After Reading” was a halfass return to form but still miles away from the sublime artistry of classics like “The Big Lebowski”, “Fargo” and “Barton Fink” One can only hope that the brothers still have it in them, but if the awards heeped on “No Country” are any indication it simply won’t matter…….
-
Introspective said:
This movie is the best that I watched recently. The plot is very original and intriguing. I was surprised by the fact that Tommy Lee Jones did nothing during whole movie, he was just appearing here and there, but he didn’t affected development of story at all.
